From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,7f4d16c4ee371eb5 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Richard D Riehle Subject: Re: Why is it Called a Package? Date: 2000/04/07 Message-ID: <8clfc1$o71$1@slb2.atl.mindspring.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 608127314 References: <38DF7F38.8D656ABD@lmtas.lmco.com> <38DFB0BC.9FF72EFC@callnetuk.com> <87u2hq857e.fsf@deneb.cygnus.argh.org> <38E2A4A4.E59E997C@research.canon.com.au> <8ck2mt$jrn$1@clnews.edf.fr> <38EE19E0.F0232DB0@Raytheon.com> Organization: MindSpring Enterprises X-Server-Date: 7 Apr 2000 20:10:41 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 2000-04-07T20:10:41+00:00 List-Id: In article <38EE19E0.F0232DB0@Raytheon.com>, "Samuel T. Harris" wrote: ... [ snipped some stuff preceding this ] ... >I'd rather see [] and {} be allowed as substitutions for () >in a similar way that ! of allowed for |, % is allowed for ", ... Curly braces, yet. I recall reading somewhere that the reason for not including curly braces in Ada was due to the worldwide shortage of { and } created by heavy usage of the C family of languages. It is simply a matter of economics. Perhaps the same economics applies to the square brackets. :-) Richard Riehle